Deval Announces He Will Raise Taxes
by Aaron Margolis, December 27th, 2006 at 04:27pm
Deval Patrick made this not-so-surprising announcement today, the Boston Herald reports.
Gov.-elect Deval Patrick announced today that he will restore more than $380 million in budget cuts made by Gov. Mitt Romney, replenishing accounts that pay for water and sewer rate relief and services for the state’s most vulnerable residents.
“Overwhelmingly, these broad-based cuts, especially coming mid-year, have a serious negative impact on thousands of Massachusetts residents who have planned for the relief and relied upon the services these programs provide,” Patrick said in a statement.
The reversal is an unusually bold move for a governor-elect who has not yet taken office, but Patrick has said in recent weeks that he wanted to restore as much money as the state’s finances would allow. The governor-elect is vacationing with his family in South Africa this week and could not be reached directly for comment.
Romney made $425 million in budget cuts in November, saying the reductions were necessary because of chronic overspending by legislators. At the time, Romney said he was doing Patrick a favor by not saddling him with a huge budget deficit as the governor-elect prepared to move into his State House offices.
But Patrick resoundingly rejected the move today, saying that emerging budget projections show the state has enough money to cover the expenditures planned through the end of June.
Of course, he also says he is “having some trouble” finding the $1 billion surplus, but says there is enough money to reverse Romney’s budget cuts.
Taxes are going up, people.
Entry Filed under: Deval Patrick
19 Comments
1. abe | December 27th, 2006 at 9:05 pm
The part that Mr. Margolis left out:
“I do not take this action lightly,” Governor-elect Patrick said.” While we support the initiatives agreed to for the current fiscal year, it is critically important for Massachusetts residents to understand that next year’s budget will be tight and will require that we make tough choices. I look forward to working with the Legislature to develop solutions that serve us well in both the short and the long term.”
2. abe | December 27th, 2006 at 9:10 pm
Second. Mr. Margolis states “Taxes are going up, people”
What do you mean by that? Can you clarify?
If you mean tax burden, I.E. tax rate, then I would have to disagree with you based on what Deval Patrick stated in the part you left out.
If you mean amount of money we pay in taxes then I would have to AGREE with you. I would also be happy that it is going up. Because that means that my INCOME is rising. Making more money is a
good thing =). Because Incomes were higher than expected, tax revenue was higher than expected which is why Deval said this:
“Slightly higher-than-expected revenue in November and December is sufficient to sustain my decision to restore those November 9C reductions not already restored by Governor Romney,” Governor-elect Patrick added.
3. Andy | December 27th, 2006 at 9:31 pm
Abe, who are you trying to kid?
Do you really think that taxes aren’t going to increase under Deval? Don’t try to dance around and play the semantics game with the whole thing about higher income and higher amount of taxes… Of course the issue is the tax rate… Don’t pretend to be ignorant of that.
4. wave maker | December 27th, 2006 at 9:35 pm
“Deval Announces He Will Raise Taxes”
Is there no appreciation for the meaning of words with you? Can you not attempt to win a debate on issues based upon the shear value of the intellectual position you take? Must you just throw rhetorical bombs out there for the sake of — what — sitemeter?
We do NOT restore the strength of our party by continuing to perpetuate this Talking Points Blather with no due regard for the intelligence of the folks who (might) read this.
USE YOUR WORDS WITH THE RESPECT THAT YOU WANT POTENTIAL VOTERS TO HAVE FOR YOU.
Man, this is simple politics 101.
5. jeremiah | December 27th, 2006 at 10:20 pm
I agree with A. Margolis. I don’t trust the politician in question and if he a) can’t seem to find/recognize our current surplus and b) can’t find the guts to cut expenditures, what do you think is going to happen?
I think all signs point to taxes going up. But I’m not going to waste time arguing the point. We’ll all get to find out soon enough.
This year I’m going to keep track of the taxes I pay. The short list is:
income tax, sales tax, property tax (both the rate and the property re-evaluation), excise tax, licensing fees, taxes/fees rolled into utility bills, tolls, fares, airport taxes
What am I missing? Or, am I unfairly including a tax that Mr. Patrick won’t have control over? (don’t bother correcting me on property taxes–he campaigned on a promise to lower that even though he has no direct control over it)
6. anthony | December 27th, 2006 at 11:21 pm
“Do you really think that taxes aren’t going to increase under Deval? Don’t try to dance around and play the semantics game with the whole thing about higher income and higher amount of taxes… Of course the issue is the tax rate… Don’t pretend to be ignorant of that.”
My tax (and most if not all MA home owners’) burden is higher now than it was four years ago and all the Healey supporters out there pretended to be ignorant of it. Please explain the difference, I’m eager to here it.
7. Maggie | December 28th, 2006 at 12:38 am
*coughing/clears throat*
in my best Claude Rains/Inspector Renault voice….
“I am shocked, shocked taxes are going to go up!”
8. demredsox | December 28th, 2006 at 9:37 am
Okay…say, for argument’s sake, they do. Would you rather the cuts remain? Cuts to help the disabled? The homeless?
9. Maggie | December 28th, 2006 at 11:31 am
Come on Dem!!! You are not buying that, are you? You don’t believe that Romney scoured the budget and took money from little kids in wheelchairs and grandmothers with no heat! You aren’t buying that he’s Ebenezer Scrooge or Marie Antoinette…..Let them eat cake! You must realize how this game is played. Romney says to a state agency “Your budget is scheduled to increase 5%, but we are only going to hike it by 3.5%. Instead of taking someone’s state car (or restricting the use thereof) or get rid of some surplus item (every budget, public, private, for profit, non-profit has pork) they look for the cut that would make Romney look like a bastid (as we say in Boston) and then they call the Globe and tell them about it. The only reason those cuts are affecting any deserving needy person is because bureaucrats are playing a game to protect their pork. I don’t think they are being evil. I think they want to have their cake and eat it too. They don’t want their clients to go without, they are just supremely confident that they can win this game. If they win (and with Deval they will - it’s what he means when he says “TWC!”) Just the other day my brothers wife was trying to explain her Deval vote and needing higher taxes. “What about paying firefighters and troopers?” she cried. My sister almost lost her mind. I just laughed. That’s some good PR there! No one is ever going to say “Please pay higher taxes so I can keep my pork filled budget growing at my bloated, hack-filled agency!”
10. wave maker | December 28th, 2006 at 12:00 pm
anthony, I am simply referring to the words in the headline. The prediction may certainly be reasonable, but rhetoric has its limits.
11. demredsox | December 28th, 2006 at 7:14 pm
Of course I’m “buying” it, Maggie. Here, how about this “pork” Romney eliminated:
http://runningahospital.blogspot.com/2006/11/awful-news-in-mental-health.html
Those darn government excesses!
Looking down the list (http://www.massbudget.org/FY07GAASupps9Cs.pdf):
Reach Out and Read Program
Supportive Child Care
Here’s a good one: Streamlining State and Local Permitting Process got it in the shorts…
One-Stop Career Centers…
Early Childhood Mental Health Consultation…
Small Business Development Center at UMass…
MCAS low-scoring student support…
Junior Achievement Grants…
School Breakfast Program…
After School Programs…
It goes on. A whole litany of cuts to programs that mainly put the hurt on the poor and underpriveleged. It this pork, Maggie? Are these bloated, hack-filled agencies?
Are the After School Programs bureaucrats “protecting their pork”? School breakfast bureaucrats?
This hurts people. Real people.
12. Knightbrigade | December 28th, 2006 at 9:29 pm
Well I guess there is NO “pork spending” in mASS. demredsox said so. It must be true…
All those cuts to the programs demredsox used as examples, were the only possible cuts that could have been made. bwahhahaha YA right…..
Let’s change the topic to spring training, there is no point to go on any further.
13. Maggie | December 28th, 2006 at 11:09 pm
Romney didn’t cut those programs. He told the different departments to cut money and they chose those programs that would pull at your heartstrings so they could get public sympathy. It’s a shell game. They don’t want to cut anything, so they put the least desirable cut out front so we will cry and restore all the money.
It’s like when you ground your teenage daughter and she says she is going to stay in her room for the rest of her life because you have ruined everything. She thinks you will feel sorry and let her off punishment.
Romney doesn’t want homeless people out in the cold or books out of libraries. He want people to spend your tax money wisely. For each department/agency to tighten their belt a little.
The very link you posted proves my point.
Department of Mental Health Commissioner Beth Childs has just informed MHA that, effective Wednesday, November 22, 2006, DMH will no longer accept inpatient admissions to any state DMH hospital or unit. In addition, DMH will restrict access to its residential programs. The Commissioner indicated that this action is being taken due to Governor Romney’s recent 9C cuts to the DMH budget.
Romney told Childs to cut something…Childs took the action. She didn’t cut her state car. She didn’t cut a hack. She didn’t even tell her staff the lay off the Staples Easy Button. She cut DMH admissions. Childs made the call. Then she made a statement to all the newspapers so Romney looked like the meanie.
It’s strategy. She took the action, called the newspapers and now she hopes that public outcry will restore her funds.
14. demredsox | December 29th, 2006 at 12:19 am
You claim (I assume it was indeed you, for I am not sure why it is in italics. I assume an HTML mixup):
“Romney told Childs to cut something…Childs took the action. She didn’t cut her state car. She didn’t cut a hack. She didn’t even tell her staff the lay off the Staples Easy Button. She cut DMH admissions. Childs made the call. Then she made a statement to all the newspapers so Romney looked like the meanie.”
It’s strategy. She took the action, called the newspapers and now she hopes that public outcry will restore her funds.
I’m sorry, but this is blantantly false. Here is the text of the cut made by the governor that is at the link I posted:
5011-0100 Administration 9C Cut $454,289
Elimination of 17 DMH staff positions, effective January 28th. Identified personnel positions include Central Office and Area program managers, licensors, housing coordinators, quality assurance staff, and managers who oversee services. As a result of significant staff reductions in previous fiscal years, these staff reductions will severely impact DMH’s ability to manage and operate ongoing client care functions.
Don’t see anything about a state car or easy buttons there.
Really, you cannot deny that this is hurting people. In fact, you don’t. In your post, while making many unsubstantiated claims about Childs, who is merely doing her job, you do admit that this does not eliminate whatever pork you claim to exist, that the cuts do go to the mental health program, and that it does hurt people. The truth is, money is being taken out of programs that help people. I do not see how that can be denied.
To Knightbrigade:
First:
“Well I guess there is NO “pork spending” in mASS. demredsox said so. It must be true…”
Okay…false claim there…I do not believe any sane person will claim there exists a total lack of pork spending, and I certainly did not.
“All those cuts to the programs demredsox used as examples, were the only possible cuts that could have been made. bwahhahaha YA right…..”
I’m not sure what you are getting at here. I did give a link to the full list of cuts made by the governor. Here it is again, in case you missed it the first time:
http://www.massbudget.org/FY07GAASupps9Cs.pdf
“Let’s change the topic to spring training, there is no point to go on any further.”
Really? I thought blogs were about rational discussion.
15. Knightbrigade | December 29th, 2006 at 3:32 am
“Okay…false claim there…I do not believe any sane person will claim there exists a total lack of pork spending, and I certainly did not.”
Oh ..OK so you acknowledge there IS such a thing as pork..cool..and who is TRYING to cut it? besides the Governor…
“I did give a link to the full list of cuts made by the governor. Here it is again, in case you missed it the first time:”
Yes nice list of cuts to programs, where are the examples of the cuts in PORK (that you acknowledge exists)?
Maggie tries to explain how hacks CUT the programs such as the ones you listed, BUT NOT the pork, but yet you keep on barking about your list. We see the list of cuts, but the intention of the cuts have been misplaced by HACKS, not the Governor. HOW would YOU..demredsox CUT the PORK!? ….
As far as a “rational discussion”, well it could be rational, but still become a circle jerk to nowhere……..But hey (Dice Man) with Shilling should be fun…..
16. Maggie | December 29th, 2006 at 6:42 am
I did mess up he italics. No you don’t see any car or easy button in what you’ve posted. Romney told Childs to cut 1.1% of her budget. She chose to cut something essential.
17. jeremiah | December 29th, 2006 at 8:01 am
First of all, most of the programs that demredsox listed are being cut by 1%. The entire budget is being cut by 2% total. There’s a difference between eliminating all services and putting pressure on agencies to cut the fat a little.
Secondly, people fight for their departments. Of course even a 1% reduction is going to cause people to scream bloody murder. Working for tax dollars is a sweet gig: little oversight, no competition and guaranteed income. All they have to do is weather this particular hiccup, and they’re good. Of course their going to raise a stink.
Thirdly, there are 7 small-print pages of services that have been reduced. I am sure that in seven pages you can find line-items that I would disagree with. On that note, I agree that Romney cut the mental health sector too deeply. That was a mistake because in today’s society there isn’t much care of any other sort for the mentally ill. Every other cut on the list in the comment above is easily justified.
18. Mr. X | December 29th, 2006 at 12:21 pm
You’re all wrong! The rainy day fund holds $2.1B…nothing wrong with using $380m now,still leaves $1.7B for urgent needs….projections are for increases of over $1B per year for the next three years by three forecasting outfits…current revenues are up 4.7% over last year….plenty of money…whoops I forgot the new heath care bill to bail out Charly Baker et. al maybe there’s not as much money as I thought. Anybody care to ask Charly “The Smartest Man in State Government” or is it “The Annointed One” Baker how much he and his fellow HMO’ers want?
19. Mr X | January 1st, 2007 at 7:28 pm
Hey Wavemaker,
Did my 12/29 comment silence you?